Senator Clinton claimed yesterday, repeatedly, that she has received more votes from people who voted than anyone else. (not a direct quote)
There are a few very interesting points to be dissected in that statement.
First of which is, Hillary is counting both Florida and Michigan to reach that conclusion. Both candidates agreed, and signed a document stating that Michigan would not count. In the Michigan Primary, only Hillary’s name appeared on the ballot. So she is counting those that voted for her, but not including in Obama’s total, the number of people who voted uncommitted, because his name wasn’t on the ballot.
The arithmetic to that is mind boggling. She is counting the votes she received, but disregarding the votes he “received” from uncommitted voters. Do you see what she did there, it is really clever. Or Dastardly.
She is also counting Florida, the other Democratic Primary that the candidates agreed would not count. I found it interesting on the night of the Florida Primary that Hill Showed up for a “victory” speech, in a Primary that was not supposed to count.
The third thing she is doing in that statement that is so interesting is she says “where people voted”, by stating this she is disregarding the states that Obama won through Caucuses. Which includes Iowa, and Texas (a state Clinton claims she won).
The problem is, the Democratic nomination is not decided on popular vote (which she is not winning regardless of what she claims) it is decided on the number of Delegates (both pledged and super) that each candidate receives. In the Delegate count, Obama is also winning. These are the rules that the Party has agreed to.
Every time Obama makes a move towards the end zone (sweet football metaphor) the Clinton camp extends the field.
On another note. I keep hearing how Obama cannot “close the deal.” I find this to be perplexing. Just five months ago Clinton was the inevitable candidate, the next President of the U.S.A. She was the one who had the former President as a husband. She was the one who had the Party infrastructure in every state. She was the one with all the donors, and the clear path to the General Election. Now her camp, and the media, would try to paint her as some kind of underdog who keeps nipping at Obama’s heals just enough to keep him from “Closing the Deal”. How do these narratives get written?
The best part of all of this is, following the May 6th Primaries in North Carolina and Indiana, all of her arguments will go out the window. Following those two votes, Obama will lead in both Delegate count, and popular vote even if she continues to count the phantom votes in Michigan and Florida, , essentally destroying this weeks argument why she should stay in the race. What will she turn to next?